Photonic Computing: Binary and Beyond? / 光计算

Computing using light -- photonic computing, or optical computing -- could be digital, analog, and perhaps of other kinds. Obviously, in the digital area, standard binary computing is worth pursuing. At least some of the commonplace binary logic gates can be constructed using beams of light; n-gates are readily made using photographic colour filters to switch colours into their "opposites." But photonic digital computing need not be limited to binary. What about trinary (ternary)? Quaternary (if that's the word)? Decimal? There may be great possibilities for transmitting and processing information that extend well beyond binary, using colour variants, or even using variations in brightness in a monochrome system.

As for analog computing, there may be some possibility of using variations in brightness the way some older analog computers used variations in water pressure (eg. MONIAC or the Soviet water integrators in use from the 1920s to the '80s). Light falling onto a medium like a fluorescent surface would leave a temporary impression which could be measured and translated back into numbers. Future developments in solar-sail tech and its miniaturization may enable micro-scale devices which can actually measure light pressure, thus enabling a photonic analog system not dependent on brightness as such -- but this seems a long way off.

And light seems like it has so many possibilities, maybe there are other types of computing possible using it, beyond digital and analog. 

By the way, for non-electric computing, light can generated using phosphorus, fluorine, or neon, or introducing extraplanetary light (especially sunlight, but there could be processing using moonlight or even starlight). The "colours" in photonic computing need not appear visually brilliant or striking to human eyes; quiet colours and slight variations in hue or brightness are all that's needed, if the system can actually register the differences.

Some interesting stuff to do with this at:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXH83P67ebk and http://shape-of-code.coding-guidelines.com/2012/07/09/ternary-radix-will-have-to-wait-for-photonic-computers/  .

Below is a simplified and probably ridiculous Chinese translation (courtesy of Google's translation program, which I do appreciate). LOL or LVQ.

 光子计算：二进制和超越？

 计算采用光 - 光子计算，或光计算 - 可能是数字，模拟，或许其他种。显然，在数码领域，标准的二进制运算是值得追求的。至少一些普通的二进制逻辑门可以使用光束来构造;正大门正在使用照相彩色过滤器的颜色切换到他们最容易制造“的对立面。”但光子数字运算不必限于二进制。怎么样三元？第四纪（如果是这样的话）？十进制？有可能是，用于发送和处理该远远超出二进制信息，利用颜色变体，或者甚至使用在单色系统的亮度变化很大的可能性。

至于模拟计算，有可能是使用的亮度变化的一些较旧的模拟计算机使用变化的水压（如MONIAC​​或苏水集成商在使用从20世纪20年代到80年代）的方式的一些可能性。光落到像荧光表面的介质会留下暂时性的印象可被测量并转换回数字。在太阳帆技术和小型化的未来发展可能使微观尺度的设备实际上可以测量光压，从而使光子模拟系统不依赖于亮度这样的 - 但是这似乎是一个很长的路要走。

和光好像它有这么多的可能性，也许还有其他类型的计算可以使用它，超越数字和模拟。

顺便说一下，对于非电动计算，光可以使用磷，氟，或氖气，或引入extraplanetary光（尤其是太阳光，但也有可能使用月光甚至星光被处理）生成的。在光子计算的“颜色”不必出现在视觉上灿烂的或引人注目的人的眼睛;安静的颜色和色调或亮度的微小变化都需要的，如果系统实际上可以注册的差异。

 一些有趣的东西，做这个的：https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXH83P67ebk; http://shape-of-code.coding-guidelines.com/2012/07/09/ternary-radix-will-have-to-wait-for-photonic-computers/。

Note on Indian Computers

The first modern Indian analog computer was apparently assembled in Calcutta (now Kolkata), in 1950. See Devaprasanna Sinha (08 2012), 'Glimpsing through Early Days of Computers in Kolkata, Computer Society of India, pgs. 5-6 [this is from Wikipedia]. (See the same source further for the first digital computer in India, at the Indian Statistical Institute in Calcutta, operational in 1956. This was purchased from the UK. http://www.csi-india.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=015efaaf-c6d4-4734-8b84-9240b906daa6&groupId=10616)

Modern Chinese mechanical computers? / 中国近代力学的计算机？

I can find very little on the subject of modern Chinese mechanical computers, so far. (I mean other than quantum mechanical computers.) Apparently there was a conference on 'Chinese mechanical computers in [the] machinery industry,' in Shanghai in October, 1992. See the site put up by the French Mechanics' Society (SFM - la Societe Francaise des Mecaniciens): http://fabri.perso.neuf.fr/sfm/LETTRESFM15.html -- but this merely mentions the conference.

There are many sources of information about the abacus, which was probably invented in Babylonia (now Iraq) thousands of years ago, and was used widely in China, among other countries. It is of course one of the major precursors of modern computers. See J.M. Pullan (1969), The History of the Abacus (New York: Praeger); also Stan Augarten (1984), Bit by Bit. An Illustrated History of Computers, pgs. 2-6. 

Peter Taylor in his fascinating book Extraordinary Cities (2013) has some very interesting things to say about today's 'China globalization' -- part of the context of any contemporary non-E computing developments in the city networks of China. 

Below is an attempt at a Chinese translation, courtesy of Google -- probably laughable, but I appreciate the program.


我能找到的很少在现代中国的机械计算机的主体，至今。 （我的意思是比量子力学的计算机等）显然有在上海的一个会议“中国机械电脑在[中]机械行业，在十月份，1992年见忍了由法国力学”协会（SFM网站 - LA兴业法兰西DES Mecaniciens）：http://fabri.perso.neuf.fr/sfm/LETTRESFM15.html - 但这仅仅是提到了会议。 

还有约算盘，这可能是发明于巴比伦（今伊拉克）几千年前，被广泛应用于中国，其他国家之间的许多资料来源。这当然是现代计算机的主要前体之一。看到有JM Pullan（1969），珠算（纽约：普拉格）的历史;还斯坦奥加唐（1984），点点滴滴。计算机图录，编着。 2-6。 

彼得·泰勒在他引人入胜的书特别的城市（2013年）有一些非常有趣的东西，说今天的“中国的全球化” - 任何当代非E计算的发展，中国的城市网络的上下文的一部分。

General reservation re quantum nanotechnology

General reservation re quantum nanotechnology: 

Since below the 50-nanometre scale the quantum size effect enters, and nanotechnology is often defined as working with matter on the scale of 100 nm or smaller, it would be best to keep to the >125 nm scale, so we continue to work with micro- not nano (quantum)-tech. This is because of the ethical and ecological problems with quantum nanotech, as well as it not having been evaluated before being commercialized -- an egregious error that endangers technological progress generally.

Proponents of tech must become hard-core proponents of rigorous full-cost accounting of the tech, or they risk the future of technology itself. They must insist upon fully funded adversarial science to investigate the downside of all big tech ventures before we OK them as a society. Even if we then go ahead with the tech, we need such research in order to come up with methods of mitigation.

For more that's critical of nanotech, see the ETC Group: www.etcgroup.org. For an article on quantum-scale mechanical computing, see: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/9923965/Steam-age-computers-could-be-tailor-made-for-the-molecular-world.html. You can find celebrations of nanotech anywhere, but for some degree of thoughtfulness in supporting the technology, see the Foresight Institute: www.foresight.org.

[Need citations.]

A 3D-printed mechanical computer; and a few implications

Chris Fenton has written about building a strictly mechanical computer with 3D-printed parts, which he calls the Turbo-Entabulator: see http://www.chrisfenton.com/the-turbo-entabulator/, plus writeups eslewhere. (See other entries on his very interesting site, including the FIBIAC electromechanical computer.)

This makes me wonder whether non-electric computing may actually benefit from 3D printing. It may be possible eventually to 'print' very fine components like microtubes with minimal friction that could be used in nonE systems. Granted such systems would then still be at best semi-electric, since you can't 3D-manufacture the parts without electricity. But again, it may give us analogies of how to proceed in a genuinely nonE manner, if this seems like a good idea.

However, there is also the usual reservation that 3D printing or 'additive manufacturing' as the industry calls it, is an unevaluated technology, commercialized in the usual disregard of the Precautionary Principle, or any accounting of social, political,  or ecological costs. This approach in the long-term will probably turn lots of people away from technological progress in general. Borrowing from Dune, we may eventually face the equivalent of the 'Butlerian Jihad' against computing systems, which would be a silly shame.

Proponents of tech must become hard-core proponents of rigorous full-cost accounting of the tech, or they risk the future of technology itself. They must insist upon fully funded adversarial science to investigate the downside of all big tech ventures before we OK them as a society. Even if we then go ahead with the tech, we need such research in order to come up with methods of mitigation.

Light-speed functions in non-electric computers? (with a perhaps laughable aside on 'faster-than-light' processes)

Of course, historically the mechanical computers like Zuse's Z1 (c1939) and electromechanical computers like the first differential analyzer at MIT (c1930) could nowhere near approach the calculating speeds of even primitive electronic computers like ENIAC (1945) or EDVAC.

Can non-electric computing achieve such speeds?

How do we achieve this? Light run along fiberoptic cables is the obvious way, perhaps with short-term memory on a photosensitive medium (eg. a fluorescent substance).

Murad (2000) (see below), writes, '...pseudo-fluid dynamic processes interestingly approach near steady-state conditions at light speed.' [I haven't applied for permission to quote this.] Has this got any implications for the use of light in computing -- eg. is there an analogue of solid-state systems here? Using microfluidics? [The blogger (me) clearly knows nothing about pseudo-fluid processes, and just thinks there's a similarity with microfluidics because of the name!]


A note on faster-than-light processes (that's a laugh):

There seem to be a number of observations in nature, as well as inferences in theory, suggesting the possibility of faster-than-light processes. If so, can we harness any of them in an eco-benign and equitable fashion, for use in nonE computing, and elsewhere? Some such processes may include:

• radio jets from quasars (Sams, Bruce J., Andreas Eckart, and Rashid Sunyaev. "Near-infrared jets in the Galactic microquasar GRS1915+ 105." Nature 382, 47 - 49 (04 July 1996).); 
• the motion of electromagnetic solitons (Bugay, A. N., & Sazonov, S. V. (2004). Faster-than-light propagation of electromagnetic solitons in nonequilibrium medium taking account of diffraction. Journal of Optics B: Quantum and Semiclassical Optics, 6(7), 328.);  
• superluminal (=faster-than-light) tunnelling of light pulses observed in photonic barrier experiments (Winful, H. G. (2003). Optics (communication arising): Mechanism for 'superluminal' tunnelling. Nature, 424(6949), 638-638.) 

But of course some of these are electric or EM processes, if they exist. How can we 'catch' a hypothetical faster-than-light particle at the quantum level and translate its action into >125-nm-scale work, without running into problems of the use of artificial substances built at the quantum level? Or of artificially-organized light-speed particles getting into material where we don't want them and toxifying it (a superluminal version of the 'grey goo' or 'green goo' problem of nanotechnology and synthetic biology).

Can we get superluminal tunnelling through a fiberoptic cable that functions as a logic gate, etc.?

See also Murad, P. A. (2000). Hyper-light dynamics and the effects of relativity, gravity, electricity and magnetism. Acta Astronautica, 47(2), 575-587. Various claims exist for superluminal devices -- just go to GoogleScholar or other academic search engine and search for 'superluminal devices.'

Non-Electronic Logic Gates

Logic gates for computation can be constructed of various materials; they don't have to be made of silicon chips with electronic transistors. Some examples:

1. Blikstein's simple water gates: see

http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/geekend/the-mit-water-computer-see-ya-electrons/540.


2. An elaboration of this: a form of microfluidics(not nanofluidics): the running of water or steam through micrometre-scale tubes.

3. Use of light along fiberoptic cables, with mechanical switching, or switching using miniaturized (125-200 nm thick) solar sails (if that's possible) made of CP1 or aluminum-reinforced Mylar. The sails would have to be extremely small and light for the minute amount of light coming along the cable to move them into their 'output' position. (See http://science.howstuffworks.com/solar-sail.htm.) Extremely difficult, but may be something here. (Of course, too, light is an electromagnetic material, but since it's neither electronic nor electric precisely we might allow it.)

General reservation re quantum nanotechnology: Since below the 50-nanometre scale the quantum size effect enters, and nanotechnology is often defined as working with matter on the scale of 100 nm or smaller, it would be best to keep to the >125 nm scale, so we continue to work with micro- not nano (quantum)-tech. This is because of the ethical and ecological problems with quantum nanotech, as well as it not having been evaluated before being commercialized -- an egregious error that endangers technological progress generally. For more that's critical of nanotech, see the ETC Group: www.etcgroup.org. You can find celebrations of nanotech anywhere, but for some degree of thoughtfulness in supporting the technology, see the Foresight Institute: www.foresight.org.